Cautions regarding design of material transfer agreements

If implemented as a general policy, Material Transfer Agreements should be very carefully thought out. Many MTAs that are in use (though certainly not all) are tantamount to claims of intellectual property rights by gardens on the germplasm in their possession (claims for which there is no basis in the CBD). Such MTAs are often so broadly worded as to require tremendous expenditures of resources (likely far beyond any benefits arising from the plant material) to implement in good faith. If MTAs are to be followed in good faith, they should be designed with great care so as to neither impose undue or unclear obligations or to stifle legitimate and beneficial exchange of material.

How do we best document & manage plants to ensure compliance with CBD? How should gardens treat plants obtained prior to 1993 before CBD came into force? What should gardens do with plants obtained since 1993 which are not in compliance?

What are best practices when using plants covered by CBD for plant breeding, plant sales, and other commercial uses? Should these also apply to plant societies and others using public gardens for their activities? What about wild origin plants obtained from commercial sources?